To the questions of what the philosophical ground for would be preserving disability experiences and what characteristics make a person, I have two incomplete answers:
The first is that understanding and preserving disability experiences foster acceptance of differences in humans so as to avoid these differences being exploited as tools of socio-political repressions. So many wars, conflicts, and genocide in human history originated from the superiority complex of a specific social group who aimed to ostracize and eliminate people different from them (i.e. differences in race, ethnicity, religion, gender, disabilities, etc.). Therefore, understanding human differences as normal allows us to acknowledge how our bodies and identities can change over a lifetime, and develop respect for others without segregating humans as the superior vs. the inferior. For example, this mode of segregation and political marginalization can be traced in American culture that considers deaf people to be “inferior races” and sign language as the most “savage” of languages. In contrast, oralism was considered “superior” and the “normal” American should be “godly, educated, civic-minded, and hearing” (Virdi 12).
The second is that acceptance of differences can facilitate understanding of individual vulnerability, hence highlighting the importance of interdependence and flexibility to accommodate varying circumstances. This prompts us to rethink the neoliberal individualistic mindset that focuses on problem solving in the form of individual cure rather than communal support (Baumann & Murray; Virdi). The history of Deaf culture shows that while “the complete reliance on speech inevitably impaired the educational and linguistic development of many if not most deaf children”, the development of sign language and funding of supporting schools, institutions, and organization successfully “provided them with an education nd introduced them to the urban deaf community” (Baynton 50). Baynton also proposed that, “Were everyone to use ‘a language addressed not to the ear, but to the eye… the present inferiority of the deaf would entirely vanish” (Baynton 49). Similarly, the touch tours discussed by Kleege shows that accommodating haptic tourism for art exhibition creates a moment of interdependence between the blind visitor and the docent. These references demonstrate that accommodation and interdependence offers space to generate new insights that wouldn’t be possible in the visual-centric interpretation of art. Therefore, the preservation of disability experiences allows opportunities to build interdependent connections that further allow us to adapt to interface with different humans and environments.